See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CU8WnyOC9E
Impressive summation of the constitutional position regarding a standing armed force and its control. However everything of importance turns on whether Parliament adequately fulfils its role to hold the Executive decisions to account and to represent the prevailing public opinion.
In both the case of the illegal bombing of Syria and the diplomatic response to the Skripal poisoning, it seems to me to have spectacularly failed.
Despite there being over 600 MP's, barely a voice of dissent or critical analysis was raised against the action of the Prime Minister and her cabinet despite in neither case either the circumstances of the case are properly know, let alone guilt being reliably apportioned. In both cases as time passes, the allegations, rather than being strengthened, are undermined.
Nor do the reasons for, or description of, the bombing attacks on Syrian targets stand up to examination.
First to bomb alleged chemical weapons producing facility would not only defeat the object but replicate the very thing being complained of, i.e. the dissemination of poisons and their dastardly consequences. However given the obvious absence of these must mean that the sites were what they were claimed to be.
Yet another Iraqi WMD moment perhaps?
Neither as to the alleged Gouta incident, or the reason for choosing the target sites, does the evidence stack up, leaving aside that under no stretch of the imagination did a casus belli or legal legitimacy exist.
The claim that this was a "humanitarian gesture" and a warning to future despots, is shown to be fatuous by the absence of any similar action against Burma, Saudi Arabia or Israel, where equally horrendous barbaric acts have been carried out against civilians.
Yet despite all this, the House was almost unanimous in its approval of the policy. That I fear proves either that Members despite all their brains, lack even the objectivity of just one individual on the Clapham Omnibus.
............................................................................................................
We have a Parliament of "representative" MP's who largely supported May and her decision, in cohort with France and the US, to bomb Syria, on the back of its illogical and un-proven claim, "It was Assad who dunnit".
This supine tribal jingoism, that potentially could have precipitated a nuclear exchange, proves the gulf that exists between the elected and electors.
Mrs May pretends that it was not America that decided events; that the timing was not chosen to avoid a Commons debate (and possible defeat); that the Gouta event was proved to be carried out by Assad; that the targets were chemical manufacturing sites; that the action has made more such events less likely; that it was done for humanitarian reasons, whilst events in Palestine and Yemen prove this to be hypocritical and clearly untrue.
So on the back of a "farrago of lies and misinformation", May is portrayed as some kind of brave Boudica, rather than the toadying promoter of unjustified aggression that she has become. It is indicative of the sad moral state of our 'representative' legislature, full of empty sound and fury but quite devoid of reason or honesty.
Jeremy Corbyn opens the Emergency Debate on the Parliamentary approval of military action overseas [Full speech]
https://www.facebook.com/NyeBevanNews/videos/2111346139079314/
Poor old Jeremy. His heart may be in the right place and his intentions good but he lacks the rhetorical eloquence and fluency required to make a cogent case. Without it, the verbal contest flounders, even if the arguments are sound. The leader of any political party needs a degree of gravitas and deportment commensurate with the role, task and subject in hand, and this is perhaps even more essential in opposition than it is in government - although Mr Trump may be the exception that proves the rule! His popularity with the public rests on his principles and common touch. His failure to impress his own party and the House of Commons has more to do with his indifferent oratory. Where Rees Mogg excels, Corbyn fails to compel.
Interview with Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on BBC HARDtalk.
Интервью Сергея Лаврова на телеканале "Би-Би-Си" для программы «Хард ток»
"This is a copy of a film that I have received from Syria. It shows the White Helmets panic stricken video of the alleged effects on children and others of the chemical attack in Douma recently.
"It also shows testimony from the members of staff featured in the video. They say that they were treating the people for dust inhalation in the basements when a White Helmet operative rushed into the emergency room and frightened everyone by screaming "Chemical weapons!". This caused panic. The ambulanceman, nurses and doctors explain exactly what is actually going on here and how the video was shot without them knowing about it.
"The first they knew was when they saw it released on the media.
"Please share this video to help people understand that the US, UK and French governments have been deceived by the White Helmets who are affiliated with Al Qaeda and have been funded by our governments to create these hoaxes.
Bashar al Assad has not used chemical weapons.
Nobody died. Nobody was gassed with chlorine.
It has all been a terrible trick."
"It also shows testimony from the members of staff featured in the video. They say that they were treating the people for dust inhalation in the basements when a White Helmet operative rushed into the emergency room and frightened everyone by screaming "Chemical weapons!". This caused panic. The ambulanceman, nurses and doctors explain exactly what is actually going on here and how the video was shot without them knowing about it.
"The first they knew was when they saw it released on the media.
"Please share this video to help people understand that the US, UK and French governments have been deceived by the White Helmets who are affiliated with Al Qaeda and have been funded by our governments to create these hoaxes.
Bashar al Assad has not used chemical weapons.
Nobody died. Nobody was gassed with chlorine.
It has all been a terrible trick."
Re. Rees-Mogg speech: Impressive summation of the constitutional position regarding a standing armed force and its control. However everything of importance turns on whether Parliament adequately fulfils its role to hold the Executive decisions to account and to represent the prevailing public opinion. In both the case of the illegal bombing of Syria and the diplomatic response to the Skripal poisoning, it seems to me to have spectacularly failed. Despite over 600 MP's, barely a voice of dissent or critical analysis was raised against the action of the Prime Minister and her cabinet despite in neither case either the circumstances of the case are properly known, let alone guilt being reliably apportioned. In both cases as time passes, the allegations, rather than being strengthened, are undermined. Nor do the reasons for, or description of, the bombing attacks on Syrian targets stand up to examination. First to bomb alleged chemical weapons producing facility would not only defeat the object but replicate the very thing being complained of, i.e. the dissemination of poisons and their dastardly consequences. However given the obvious absence of these consequences, must mean that the sites were not what they were claimed to be. Yet another Iraqi moment perhaps? Neither as to the alleged Gouta incident, nor the reason for choosing the target sites, does the evidence stack up, leaving aside that under no stretch of the imagination did a 'casus belli' or legal legitimacy exist. The claim that this was an "humanitarian gesture" and a warning for the future, is shown to be fatuous by the absence of any similar action against Burma, Saudi Arabia or Israel, where equally horrendous barbaric acts have been carried out against civilians. Yet despite all this, the House was almost unanimous in its approval of the policy. That I fear proves either that Members despite all their brains, lack even the objectivity of just one individual on the Clapham Omnibus. The whole country can see the Novichok and Syrian affairs are a deceptive 'house of cards'. It is only the politicians in Westminster who can't apparently.
ReplyDeleteVery good discussion here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltZbEi0Ptdo
ReplyDeleteWe have developed, with the help of the zionists, into Nazi Germany (or almost) The State over rules the parents in life and death situations, whilst ignoring ritual abuse. 'Death pathways' for the elderly are all the rage. Increasingly treatment, housing, care and education are determined by wealth not need. We make up false reasons for war with Russia. We bomb and invade Syria on the back of false flags. It supports state murder in Gaza, Burma and Yemen. The State allows civilized society to fall to pieces. It covers up extensive abuse and corruption and Ministers refuse to resign. It militarises the police and allows shoot to kill whilst allowing drug gangs to kill at will. It neutralises the second chamber to allow the minority dictatorship to do what it wants. It spends huge amounts on vanity projects whilst allowing the poor to get poorer and the homeless to die on the streets. It uses fabricated terrorism to justify ever more monitoring and control of free speech. It uses falsehood and propaganda - particularly 'anti-semitic' - to demonise and denigrate the opposition. It wants to hold on to power at any cost and will do anything to ensure it. Isn't it time the people took control before the power to do so is removed for ever?
ReplyDelete